mandag 30. november 2015

Why I'm burning my last bridge with Obama

Join me as I wreck my last artifact of support for the war criminal-in-chief!! I figured out the fraud a while back, but recently found this shirt in my closet :)

All images & videos protected under the Fair Use Act ;)
Music: "In the Hall of the Mountain King" by Edvard Grieg

Erodgan Owes Syria 100Bn for Stolen Oil, Iraq Owed $1.5Tn

Putin: ISIS Huge Oil Pipe line Result of Ankara Naivety
…by Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
Over the last two weeks, Russia has been destroying the “living pipeline” that has allowed Turkey to steal tens of millions of barrels of Syrian crude oil, much of it at peak market prices, while only paying their ISIS allies a pittance.
This process isn’t new.  Turkey did this all during the Bush era, having cut a deal with US “manager” Paul Bremmer, a deal VT insiders helped manage for Bremmer and that I was witness to personally.
The game involved playing Baghdad against Erbil and bleeding off oil revenues from the Kirkuk Oil Fields, largest oil reserves in the world, as they moved by pipeline through Kurdistan and into Turkey.  There they were offloaded onto American tankers in the Mediterranean where these huge ships, largest in the world, were filled with oil but it was never recorded and the oil never paid for.
Turkey got their cut, certain Turkish naval officers became fabulously wealthy while the Bush cabal poured billions into their Cayman offshore accounts managed by Bain Capital.
During the Bush era “War on Terror,” up to 40% of Iraqi crude oil, up to half of what was sent through Turkey on the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline was stolen.  Our investigations between 2005-7 which included meetings between Gordon Duff and Iraqi and Kurdish leaders in both Erbil and Tikrit covered this issue.
Active ship identification and locator services tracked loaded stolen cargoes so obviously any moron could figure it out
 Active ship identification and locator services tracked loaded stolen cargoes so obviously any moron could figure it out

VT sources within the Turkish Navy at Ceyhan, Turkey,  reported Exxon tankers loading up to 2 million barrels of Kirkuk light sweet crude oil at a time did so “off the record.”
oil supertankers loading Iraqi crude at Ceyhan, Turkey
oil supertankers loading Iraqi crude at Ceyhan, Turkey

Inside Iraq, VT editor Alex Powers, who helped oversee Iraqi oil sales and production for Paul Bremmer, confirmed these findings.
4 tankers at a time loaded, only two were listed and Iraq was paid for. This went on for years.
4 tankers at a time loaded, only two were listed and Iraq was paid for. This went on for years.

Russian reconnaissance footage have shown oil is being smuggled through ISIS-held areas in Syria into Turkey day and night. There are vehicles carrying oil, lined up in a chain going beyond the horizon.
Vladimir Putin accused Turkey of allowing ISIS Terrorists to run a “living oil pipe” across its border as he upped the ante in the row over the downing of a Russian jet.
The Russian President said that reconnaissance footage, shared with world leaders at the G20 summit earlier this month, showed that oil was being smuggled through terrorist-held areas in Syria into Turkey “day and night”. There were “vehicles, carrying oil, lined up in a chain going beyond the horizon”, he claimed.
Speaking after talks at the Kremlin with the French President Francois Hollande, Putin accused Ankara of false naivety over ISIS’s huge oil operation. “Let’s assume that Turkey’s political leadership knows nothing about it – it’s theoretically possible, albeit hard to believe,” he said. “There may be elements of corruption and insider deals. They should deal with it.”
Putin has gone for the jugular after the Turkish military shot down the Russian SU-24 jet after accusing it of violating its airspace during an operation in northern Syria. The incident is thought to be the first time in 50 years that a NATO member has downed a Russian plane.
Turkey is acutely sensitive to claims that it is turning a blind eye to ISIS, a view held not only by Russia but also by Western states who believe that Turkey has not done enough to prevent terrorists from slipping across its 500-mile border with Syria; reported.

SPREAD THIS: Chuck Norris Reveals 1 HUGE Piece of Hillary’s Past She Did NOT Want America to See

Most people think that the two most important names in the Democratic race for the White House in 2016 are Obama and Clinton. However, the two names you should be paying attention to are Cloward and Piven.
Don’t know who they are? Don’t worry, most people don’t — but conservative commentator and generally kicka** guy Chuck Norris is going to make sure they do.

In an op-ed for WND, Norris explained that the two people — Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven — were academics who came up with a plan to introduce permanent socialism in the United States.

Norris said that “the Cloward-Piven strategy is a political plan created in 1966 by two Columbia University sociologists to overload the U.S. public welfare system, the goal being to replace it with a national system of ‘a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty.’

“I echo again that it’s neither a coincidence that Obama graduated from Columbia University nor that others who espoused the Cloward-Piven strategy were a group of radicals who have been a part of his life and education: Bill Ayers, Saul Alinsky, Bernardine Dohrn, George Wiley, Frank Marshall Davis, Wade Rathke and George Soros, among others,” Norris continued.

“What’s also not a coincidence is how close Hillary ran in the same circles.”

Norris then goes on to make the frightening connections.
“Robert Chandler, a retired Air Force colonel and former strategist for the White House … explained in the Washington Times that ‘much of (the Cloward-Piven) strategy was drawn from Saul Alinsky.’ There’s no doubt that Alinsky’s life and work served as the coach and plan for Cloward and Piven,” Norris writes.

“Hillary’s similar discipleship devotion was clearly seen by her 92-page college thesis paper on Saul Alinsky, which is a glimpse behind the present veil of her politically savvy and guarded gloss into the heart of her true ideologies … No surprise that in 1993, the Clintons asked officials at her alma mater to hide Hillary Rodham’s senior thesis from Clinton biographers.”

Norris also notes that the “Motor Voter” law, which was signed by Bill Clinton, was the brainchild of Cloward and Piven.

Barbara Ehrenreich, a collaborator of Cloward and Piven’s, wrote that the movement for such a law “was dedicated to the idea that if citizens were allowed to register to vote when they apply for aid from government programs or for drivers’ licenses, some of the historic administrative encumbrances on the right to vote could be overcome.

“The poor in particular, who often lack the time for voter registration, would be effectively enfranchised.”

And that’s not all.

“What’s not surprising is how the ‘Motor Voter’ law has morphed to incorporate more Cloward-Piven-Clinton strategies,” Norris wrote.

“For example in Oregon, legislators have just enacted a subsidiary law that registers a person to vote when they obtain or renew a state driver’s license. That might sound all fine and dandy, too, until one realizes that a stone’s throw away in neighboring states like California, they are doling out licenses to 1.5 million illegals over the next three years. How long will it be until California’s Motor Voter laws extend voting rights to illegals, too?”

“A first-year political student can easily see where a Hillary presidency will take Cloward-Piven strategies,” Norris concluded.

“You see, the plan to ‘fundamentally transform the United States of America’ has a successor, and she must be stopped.”

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree that Hillary must be stopped.

Yatsenyuk: Ukraine lacks coal for winter, extraordinary measures needed

November 30, 2015-
 Fort Russ
Translated for 
Fort Russ by 
J. Arnoldski
"Yatsenyuk: Ukraine doesn't have enough coal for the winter, extraordinary measures are needed"

The Prime Minister of Ukraine, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, has stated that Ukraine does not have enough stockpiles of coal for the winter. He demanded that an emergency plan of measures be worked out to solve the problem.

“According to the date which I have, it is clear that, as I warned three months ago, there is not a sufficient supply of coal. In order to avoid power outages as last year, I urgently demand an extraordinary plan of measures in order to pass the winter with a stable energy system in the country. This is now the topic of discussion,” Yatsenyuk stated during a meeting with the anti-crisis energy headquarters. 

According to him, the state has allocated necessary resources, and now needs to get down to business. 

The head of the Ministry of Energy of Ukraine, Vladimir Demchishin, said earlier on Friday that the coal reserves of Ukraine are sufficient for at least one month, “but in the longer term problems will arise.”

According to Demchishin, at the present moment supplies of coal from Russia and Donbass to Ukraine are restricted. 

This week, the Donetsk People’s Republic suspended deliveries of coal to Kiev-controlled territories and has stated that it will not resume deliveries until Ukraine restores the power supply to Crimea. 

Turkey Blockades Russian Shipping, Black Sea Fleet Completely Cut off

Turkey is authorized to close the Straits to all foreign warships in wartime or when it was threatened by aggression

Turkey has begun a defacto blockade of Russian naval vessels,  preventing transit through the Dardanelles and the Strait of Bosporus, between the Black Sea and Mediterranean.
According to the AIS tracking system for the movement of maritime vessels, only Turkish vessels are moving along the Bosphorus, and in the Dardanelles there is no movement of any shipping at all.

At the same time, both from the Black Sea, and from the Mediterranean Sea, there is a small cluster of ships under the Russian flag, just sitting and waiting. 

The image below shows the situation with the ships using the GPS transponder onboard each vessel:

In addition, shipping inside the Black Sea from Novorossiisk and Sevastopol in the direction of the Bosphorus, no Russian vessels are moving. This indirectly confirms the a CNN statement that Turkey may have blocked the movement of Russian ships on the Dardanelles and the Strait of Bosporus.

There is a Treaty specifically covering the use of these waterways by nations of the world.  That Treaty is the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits.

It is a 1936 agreement that gives Turkey control over the Bosporus Straitsand the Dardanelles and regulates the transit of naval warships. The Convention gives Turkey full control over the Straits and guarantees the free passage of civilian vessels in peacetime. It restricts the passage of naval ships not belonging to Black Sea states. The terms of the convention have been the source of controversy over the years, most notably concerning theSoviet Union‘s military access to the Mediterranean Sea.

Signed on 20 July 1936 at the Montreux Palace in Switzerland, it permitted Turkey to remilitarise the Straits. It went into effect on 9 November 1936 and was registered in League of Nations Treaty Series on 11 December 1936. It is still in force today, with some amendments.

The Convention consists of 29 Articles, four annexes and one protocol. Articles 2–7 consider the passage of merchant ships. Articles 8–22 consider the passage of war vessels. The key principle of freedom of passage and navigation is stated in articles 1 and 2. Article 1 provides that “The High Contracting Parties recognize and affirm the principle of freedom of passage and navigation by sea in the Straits”. Article 2 states that “In time of peace, merchant vessels shall enjoy complete freedom of passage and navigation in the Straits, by day and by night, under any flag with any kind of cargo.”

The International Straits Commission was abolished, authorizing the full resumption of Turkish military control over the Straits and the refortification of the Dardanelles. Turkey was authorized to close the Straits to all foreign warships in wartime or when it was threatened by aggression; additionally, it was authorized to refuse transit from merchant ships belonging to countries at war with Turkey.

Turkey has now invoked its power, but has not publicly stated whether they are blocking Russian Naval Vessels because Turkey is “threatened with aggression” or whether Turkey considers itself to be “at war.”  Last week, Turkey shot down a Russian military jet over Syria and this has caused a major rift between the two nations.

This latest development of blockading Russian naval vessels is a massive and terrifyingly dangerous development.  Blockading Russia and preventing its Black Sea fleet from traveling to the rest of the world, or back to its home port,  is something that will not sit well with the Russians.

Earlier today, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered the deployment of 150,000 Russian troops and equipment into Syria, but then ALSO ordered the deployment of 7,000 additional Russian Troops, tanks, rocket launchers and artillery, to the Russian Border of Turkey at Armenia, with orders to be “fully combat ready.”

It is important to note two things:

1) Turkey is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as is the United States and most of Europe, AND;

2) Turkey took the first shot at Russia when they intentionally shot down a Russian jet last week.

It is important to remember these facts because, as a NATO member, Turkey can invoke Article 5 of the NATO Treaty which requires all NATO members to come to its defense if Turkey is “attacked.”  So if Russia decides to fight back against Turkey downing its military jet, the Turks might call NATO and claim they’ve been “attacked” thereby calling-up NATO forces to go to war against Russia.

It bears remembering, however, that Turkey shot first.  Turkey was the nation which “attacked.”
Before NATO and the world get dragged into a war between Russia and Turkey, the citizens of the world must be ready to remind our leaders that Turkey Shot First.

Why did the Turks shoot?  Because Turkey has been allowing the terrorist group ISIS to sell the oil it has stolen from countries it is conquering.  The oil is transported from the wells in countries where ISIS has seized power, is taken by truck to Turkey, and is then sold at cheap prices on the black market.

Turkey has no legal, economic basis to close bosphorus for Russian ships
Permalink til innebygd bilde

This black market selling results in over 1 Million dollars per DAY flowing into ISIS to keep it equipped and supplied for its ongoing terrorist activities.  Only a fool would think that all this is going on through Turkey, without some Turkish officials having their hands out for money from the illegal oil sales.  Put simply, Turkey appears to be in business with ISIS and Russia is harming that by attacking ISIS in Syria.

So Turkey shot down one of the Russian planes that was attacking ISIS.  Russia is quite furious; with the Russian President stating the shoot down was “a stab in the back of Russia” and was carried out by “accomplices to terrorism.”

It would be shocking if NATO were to defend Turkey under such circumstances because by its actions, Turkey is providing material support to the terrorist group ISIS.  For NATO to defend that would make all of us accomplices to terrorism.

Editor’s note: Information on the closure the Bosphorus, aka the Istanbul Strait, is up on the Turkish Straits website. The providers of information to are the following companies:

  • Düzgit Vapur Hizmetleri Tic. A.Ş. – Strait of İstanbul Northern Entrance – established 1966
  • Denizciler Düzgit Gemi Acenteliği Tic. Ltd. Şti. – Strait of Çanakkale – established 1984
  • GEMTAC – S.S. Gemi Tali Acenteleri Deniz Motorlu Taşıyıcılar Kooperatifi
    – Strait of İstanbul Southern Entrance – established 2005

Concerns over impacts of UK strikes on ISIL in Syria

News | 30.11.2015 

As Britain is moving toward a crucial decision on whether to launch air strikes against ISIL terrorists in Syria, analysts are warning that the move could have serious backlashes on the country in terms of public dissatisfaction and national security threats. 

 Reza Nadim, a political commentator from London, told Press TV that the chances for Britain to get militarily involved in Syria are high, but emphasized that any potential military campaign against ISIL in Syria will to the same degree lead to a rise in public dissatisfaction in Britain.    

“The British government has tried to manipulate the Paris terror attacks to justify having more air strikes (on  ISIL),” Nadim said. 

Nevertheless, he warned that military strikes that are launched in the name of fighting the ISIL will occasionally take heavy tolls on the civilians.  

“They are going to hit children, they are going to hit women, they are going to hit people,” he said.
“We are going to have to see a lot more deaths. We are going to see a lot more refugees and a lot more refugees,” Nadim said, adding that this will eventually help the ISIL with its recruitment efforts for new terrorists. 

He further expressed concern that Britain could soon find itself at major security risks as a result of waging a direct war on ISIL terrorists. 

“For Britain to go and attack ISIL is inviting more problems on [Britain’s] shores,” said Nadim. “We have to remember that when the Paris attacks happened ISIL said the reason they were doing this was a response to France’s air strikes in Syria.”  

He emphasized that military action will not solve the Syrian crisis, adding that the world needs to find a political solution to end the atrocities that are taking place in the country.  

Clive Hambidge, a London-based political commentator, told Press TV that the fate of any decision to launch air strikes on ISIL terrorists in Syria hangs in the balance. 

This, Hambidge said, is because that there are serious splits inside the Labour party – that has been traditionally opposing any new military involvement in the Middle East – over the issue.

He warned that Britain is at risk of security threats by the ISIL as does France and other European countries that are fighting ISIL. 

Hambidge further emphasized that Britain needs to promote moderate Muslims to approach radical Islamists to discourage them from committing acts of violence.  

This channel, he said, will be destroyed if Britain starts a military campaign against ISIL in Syria.   

Hambidge also said the fate of any potential call by France on NATO to adopt a unified action against ISIL is still similarly unclear. 

This, he said, is due to the military presence of Russia in Syria.

On the other hand, there have been suggestions that the downing of the Russian plane was not the work of Turkey and was perpetrated by the CIA, Hambidge added. 
“So the situation is very, very complicated.” 

Mark Anthony France, the local organizer of the Momentum activist movement in Birmingham, told Press TV that Cameron’s push to launch military strikes against the ISIL is due to “domestic political reasons”, stressing that the prime minister’s agenda is not based on “any genuine concern for the victims of Paris terror attacks”.   

Anthony emphasized that Britain lacks the adequate military capability to create any significant change on the ground against ISIL in Syria. 

“I think the British military capacity is simply not there and this is more about domestic politics, the desire to isolate the anti-war leadership of the British Labour party,” he said.  

“Cameron wants to have a war so that he can reap the political advantages that come from launching the wars as did the late prime minister Margaret Thatcher through war in the Falkland Islands in 1982.” 

Anthony accused the British political leadership of “cynically seizing upon the public anger” that emerged after Paris terror attacks to press ahead its own agenda. 

Nevertheless, he warned that this could result in a backlash given that the British people  have learned from the experiences of previous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  

“The reality is that people understand that the lengthy campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq did nothing to make Britain more secure as a nation,” said Anthony. 

He added that intelligence reports have already established a link between the British involvement in wars in the two countries with the London terrorist attacks in 2005. 

Anthony further warned that if Britain decides to launch any military action in Syria, it will expose itself to potential future terrorist attacks by ISIL.  

The prisoners of the Dnipro 1 Battalion tell their story

In Dnipress. com, November 29, 2015

 Fort Russ
Translated from French by Tom Winter
Note: the DONI.Press has a "Pick your language" array of buttons, but since "English" brought me a "page not available," I pitched in.

DONi.Press offices in the center of Donetsk. I am waiting for a couple of prisoners exchanged by Republicans with the Ukrainians. I am surprised to see six people arrive here. Thus, the interview I expected immediately gets complicated as it becomes difficult to stop the flow of words. 

All are afraid: they have relatives in the occupied area of Donbass, they are from different localities, especially around Mariupol but also Kharkov. Right off, a real flood of horrors emerges. Exchanged, about a month back, they were debriefed by the authorities but also by the International Red Cross that is present in Donetsk. In the space of an hour and a half, I sink in the corridors of horror.

The first witness is a young man, he is restless, gets scared at the sight of computers, he panics, paces back and forth in our offices. It will be impossible to interview him: he is extremely nervous and he repeats several times that his family will be in big danger if any video, photo, or his name appear on the Internet. 

A second witness, a fiftyish Donetsk man, agreed to speak on camera. The interview was cut short, as his voice soon fails him, emotions are too strong for him to present a coherent testimony. A third witness nods, he remains aloof and seems as frightened but quieter than the first two. He remains seated, shoulders slumped -- he must have many things yet to reveal, but things will just have to wait, as it will for the others.

A fourth man, aged about 55, begins and the words pour out for an hour: "I was arrested in December 2014 by four men from SBU. They jumped me, put a bag over my head, and I found myself in a muscle interrogation. 

"I was an anti-maidan protester just like many others but I have never taken up arms or otherwise expressed my opposition except peacefully. They stuck a document in front of me. I had to sign. I had been beaten severely, with batons, rifle butts, feet, fists. Blows rained. They threatened to take my family -- finally I agreed to sign. "We know where your daughter lives, a detour by car and the matter will be resolved quickly." So I signed. 

"I was taken to different prisons, finally I was locked in a cellar in Kharkov with other prisoners. We had nothing to eat but a bowl of porridge and a slice of bread a day. For a toilet we only had a bucket, and my friend here today can attest, in ten months we didn't get taken out to shower but five times."

"At one point, when two months had passed I was judged. The paper I had signed stated that I was "a coordinator for separatist artillery"-- of course a vile lie. It was a semblance of a court, a judge, a prosecutor, a lawyer with whom I spoke just five minutes, the case was wrapped up in minutes. My confinement was extended. I was led in chains, always with a bag over my head, to the spot of the court hearing. I once heard a man speak English, but I did not see his face. 

"When they came for me, to tell me I was free, they gave me my passport, they stole my money, my phone. In eleven months I was never able to call my family. They handed me my Ukrainian passport, I went out of the prison, but I hardly was out the door, when five men set on me. Bag on my head again. I was dragged into a cellar. I do not know how long they beat me, you lose awareness of time, it was dark, no windows. 

"They left me on a stool an infinite time telling me that some trainees would come to look after me later. I saw only once, the badge of a soldier, when my bag had slipped under the blows, it was the insignia of the Dnieper-1 reprisal battalion."

The man speaks without stopping, sometimes I sense his fear, anger, or hate, always I see the stirrings of his soul, because he certainly was revisiting the scenes he was recounting: 

"Our cell was in a basement We were in a room of 13 meters by 5, 8. The only window was blocked, we were incommunicado. We had no right to talk with other prisoners. There were also women. One of them, young, was imprisoned for one month all by herself, in the dark and without talking to anyone. When they took her out for a short walk in the corridor, she was talking to herself, she was going crazy, we did not have the right to talk to her, I know that her name was Aniuta, and that's all. 

"The Red Cross came to our prison. I found out through a French woman, Charline, who came to visit the prison. She told me that Ukrainians had her visit clean empty cells, they made a quick tour, then I told her where we were in the basement with several dozen prisoners. She spoke Russian, not very well, but enough for me to understand that she came to our prison. 

"We could not see anyone, we were constantly being humiliated by the guards. Finally, in October we were told that we would be released, we were taken to a location near the front. But finally they brought us back to Kharkov. They were furious 'it is the separatists who have bollixed your liberation' they told us, but we knew they were lying."

The man was panting, his courage, his pain awakens the senses of other exchanged prisoners. It was then a succession of identical sad horrors that spread into conversations. A fifth man was there with his wife, they end up talking too: 

"They came to arrest my husband when he came looking for me at work, it was in the street, they jumped him, it was over in a few minutes. I never knew where he was, but I was hoping he would return. I lived like that for a year. From the beginning I got phone calls at all hours of day and night, 'you're going to suffer the same fate as your husband, get out, go to Russia, go to Belarus, we do not want see you here,' so one day I left and got refuge with relatives in Rostov. "

The young woman, not yet thirty, continues her story while her husband laughs at times, a disturbing, nervous laugh, grimacing with pain: 
"They beat me brutally, the worst is that they weren't asking any question, it was just blows and and more blows. When one got tired, another took the baton and then you know the rest. I was thrown into a dungeon with comrades who are here, 11 of us were being released. 

"When they released us, we were emaciated. We all suffer from traumatic injuries caused by the torture sessions. Personally I have several damaged vertebrae in the neck, my friend here has five vertebrae in the middle of the back that are affected. This is due to the blows of military rangers, in the back, sometimes with the edge of the heel. I believe that there is a divine justice, God sees and they will have to answer to him, one day or another. "

The interview came to an end, the succession of horrors and torture was so intense that I can not remember the totality of it, there is too much, what element to put in front of another? I can easily imagine myself interviewing French resistance fighters after the Gestapo has had them, and I understand at this time more than ever the infamy of these inhuman acts. 

All end up telling me they want to talk to me, to keep going, I propose to let some time pass and to question them one by one. In the evening I go home, I do not hurry my steps, it's my job to go home with this emburdening and to deal with it. 

Reading the atrocities committed by the Gestapo is one thing; to realize that the same thing is going on in the Ukraine of Kiev in 2015 is unendurable. However before the journalist, there is the historian. Man is definitely the worst kind who ever breathed on Earth, but also the best; I know that the perpetrators will be struck down, history will take care of them.

The prisoners declared before leaving that even now, hundreds of prisoners are still in the terrible detention conditions where they found themselves.
Thousands Of Russian Troops Head To Turkish Border As US Planes Flee From Syrian Skies

Posted by on Nov 28th, 2015
A stunning new Ministry of Defense (MoD) report circulating in the Kremlin states that President Putin, this morning, issued an order to the 58th Army Headquarters of the North-Caucasian Military District to immediately deploy “selected” regiments and brigades of Federation military electronic warfare, anti-aircraft, multiple rocket launcher, anti-tank, motorized rifle, and artillery forces to the Turkish-Armenia border—which in total comprises nearly 7,000 Russian troops now being put into full combat status.

According to this report, the legal authorization for this massive combat deployment is due to the joint Russian-Armenian missile air defense system agreement ordered to be signed by President Putin on 11 November and which will be finalized this week by Prime Minister Medvedev.

With Armenia now becoming a vital part of the Russian Joint Air Defense, this report continues, Federation military forces will now be able to counter threats from Turkey coming from that nations western border—which will mirror the air defense protections provided by Federation Aerospace and Naval forces on Turkey’s border with Syria that since being implemented this past week have seen both United States and Turkish aircraft completely cease flying missions against Islamic State terrorists in this war zone all together.

Important to note too about this Federation military deployment to Armenia, this report says, are that these forces will be protected, like their counterparts operating in Syria, with S-400 Triumf (NATO designation: SA-21 Growler) medium/long-range mobile surface-to-air missile systems and Krasukha-4 jamming platforms giving them near total air defense superiority over 85 percent of Turkish territory.

The Krasukha-4 broadband multifunctional jamming station is mounted on a BAZ-6910-022 four-axle-chassis and like the Krasukha-2, the Krasukha-4 counters NATO-Turkish AWACS and other air borne radar systems. The Krasukha-4, also, has the range for effectively disrupting low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites and can cause permanent damage to targeted radio-electronic devices with ground based radars also being a viable target—which is, undoubtedly, MoD experts in this report state, the reason US and Turkish aircraft have fled from the skies over Syria.

With the criminal Erdogan regime in Turkey continuing to support Islamic State terrorists in Syria and Iraq, this report further notes, President Putin’s order today to begin the deployment of Federation military forces to Armenia will protect that nations peoples from their barbaric Turkish enemies who just a century ago (1915-1917) massacred an estimated 1.5 million men, women and children in what is known now as the Armenian Genocide.

And to the great shame of the United States against these Armenia peoples too, this report grimly states, President Obama, this past August, and for the 7th year in row, broke his promise to them to acknowledge the genocide committed against them by Turkey.

The Federation, however, this report continues, is not only one of the 25 nations that has acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, this past week a bill was introduced into the Russian parliament on holding to account anyone who denies that the killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turkish forces was “genocide”.

With Turkish President Erdogan having lashed out at Russia, Germany and France for recognizing the Armenian Genocide, this report warns, his actions against the Kurdish peoples in the Levant Region are even more troubling—especially since this past summer when he broke off all peace talks with them.

But to the Federations greatest fears of the criminal Erdogan necessitating the deployment of thousands of Russian troops to Turkey’s border, this report concludes, is his using of Islamic State terrorists to create for himself a new empire—and which he and his Prime Minister this past May (2015) made no secret of when they declared to the entire Islamic world:

“We Will Gather Together Kurds And Arabs, And All Of The Muslim World, And Invade Jerusalem, And Create A One World Islamic Empire.”

Is Kiev Using Russia-Turkey Tensions to Trouble Crimea?

Power supply situation in Crimea
© Sputnik

Hoping that Moscow’s attention is distracted by a political stand-off with Turkey, the Ukrainian government arranged the blackout of Crimea. However, by doing this Kiev might not only cause a humanitarian crisis in Crimea, but also risks losing the delivery of gas and coal from Russia, journalist Max Tucker wrote.

A senior Ukrainian government representatives said Ukraine isn't doing much to repair the damaged pylons because Kiev hopes to squeeze out concessions from Russia, while Moscow's involved in a conflict with Turkey after its Air Force shot down a Russian Su-24 bomber on Tuesday.

"The Ukrainian government appears to be trying to make Crimea an expensive burden for Moscow," Tucker wrote for Politico.

Furthermore, the Ukrainian government fears that if Crimea falls off of the current international agenda, after a certain amount of time the West would recognize the peninsula as a part of Russia, the author said.
The government in Kiev told Brussels that it was under pressure from nationalist groups, who blew up the power lines. Although Kiev said the blockade was illegal, the government did nothing to prevent it. On the contrary, Ukrainian police at checkpoints to the power lines and nationalists seemed to have worked in tandem. Moreover, Ukrainian nationalists threatened to disrupt power to Crimea and have already made several attempts to damage the power lines in the past. Despite this, the Ukrainian government did nothing to secure the electric lines to Crimea, Tucker said.
 Earlier this week, Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said that Moscow could respond to the Crimean blackout by halting coal deliveries to Ukraine.

Last week, some 2.5 million Crimeans were left without electricity after the electric power lines were blown up in southern Ukraine.

Following the blackout, Crimea declared a state of emergency and switched to locally-based emergency power generation.

Since then the Russian Emergencies Ministry sent electricity generators to the peninsula.    

From 1945 - 49 the US and UK Planned to Bomb Russia into the Stone Age

Was the US cold war military doctrine really “defensive” and who actually started the nuclear arms race?

This article originally appeared at Sputnik - International news agency

Just weeks after the Second World War was over and Nazi Germany defeated Soviet Russia's allies, the United States and Great Britain hastened to develop military plans aimed at dismantling the USSR and wiping out its cities with a massive nuclear strike.
Interestingly enough, then British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had ordered the British Armed Forces' Joint Planning Staff to develop a strategy targeting the USSR months before the end of the Second World War. The first edition of the plan was prepared on May 22, 1945. In accordance with the plan the invasion of Russia-held Europe by the Allied forces was scheduled on July 1, 1945.

Winston Churchill's Operation Unthinkable

The plan, dubbed Operation Unthinkable, stated that its primary goal was “to impose upon Russia the will of the United States and the British Empire. Even though 'the will' of these two countries may be defined as no more than a square deal for Poland, that does not necessarily limit the military commitment.”

The British Armed Forces' Joint Planning Staff underscored that the Allied Forces would win in the event of 1) the occupation of such metropolitan areas of Russia so that the war making capacity of the country would be reduced to a point to which further resistance would become impossible”; 2) “such a decisive defeat of the Russian forces in the field as to render it impossible for the USSR to continue the war.”

British generals warned Churchill that the “total war” would be hazardous to the Allied armed forces.

However, after the United States “tested” its nuclear arsenal in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, Churchill and right-wing American policy makers started to persuade the White House to bomb the USSR. A nuclear strike against Soviet Russia, exhausted by the war with Germany, would have led to the defeat of the Kremlin at the same time allowing the Allied Forces to avoid US and British military casualties, Churchill insisted. Needless to say, the former British Prime Minister did not care about the death of tens of thousands of Russian peaceful civilians which were already hit severely by the four-year war nightmare.
“He [Churchill] pointed out that if an atomic bomb could be dropped on the Kremlin, wiping it out, it would be a very easy problem to handle the balance of Russia, which would be without direction,” an unclassified note from the FBI archive read.

An atomic cloud billows above Hiroshima city following the explosion of the first atomic bomb to be used in warfare in Hiroshima, in this handout photo taken by the U.S. Army on August 6, 1945, and distributed by the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. The words written on the photo are from the source
An atomic cloud billows above Hiroshima city following the explosion of the first atomic bomb to be used in warfare in Hiroshima, in this handout photo taken by the U.S. Army on August 6, 1945, and distributed by the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. The words written on the photo are from the source

Following in Churchill's Footsteps: Operation Dropshot
Unthinkable as it may seem, Churchill's plan literally won the hearts and minds of US policy makers and military officials. Between 1945 and the USSR's first detonation of a nuclear device in 1949, the Pentagon developed at least nine nuclear war plans targeting Soviet Russia, according to US researchers Dr. Michio Kaku and Daniel Axelrod. In their book “To Win a Nuclear War: the Pentagon's Secret War Plans,” based on declassified top secret documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, the researchers exposed the US military's strategies to initiate a nuclear war with Russia.
“The names given to these plans graphically portray their offensive purpose: Bushwhacker, Broiler, Sizzle, Shakedown, Offtackle, Dropshot, Trojan, Pincher, and Frolic. The US military knew the offensive nature of the job President Truman had ordered them to prepare for and had named their war plans accordingly,” remarked American scholar J.W. Smith (“The World's Wasted Wealth 2”).
These “first-strike” plans developed by the Pentagon were aimed at destroying the USSR without any damage to the United States.
The 1949 Dropshot plan envisaged that the US would attack Soviet Russia and drop at least 300 nuclear bombs and 20,000 tons of conventional bombs on 200 targets in 100 urban areas, including Moscow and Leningrad (St. Petersburg). In addition, the planners offered to kick off a major land campaign against the USSR to win a “complete victory” over the Soviet Union together with the European allies. According to the plan Washington would start the war on January 1, 1957.
For a long period of time the only obstacle in the way of the US' massive nuclear offensive was that the Pentagon did not possess enough atomic bombs (by 1948 Washington boasted an arsenal of 50 atomic bombs) as well as planes to carry them in. For instance, in 1948 the US Air Force had only thirty-two B-29 bombers modified to deliver nuclear bombs.

In September 1948 US president Truman approved a National Security Council paper (NSC 30) on “Policy on Atomic Warfare,” which stated that the United States must be ready to “utilize promptly and effectively all appropriate means available, including atomic weapons, in the interest of national security and must therefore plan accordingly.”

At this time, the US generals desperately needed information about the location of Soviet military and industrial sites. So far, the US launched thousands of photographing overflights to the Soviet territory triggering concerns about a potential Western invasion of the USSR among the Kremlin officials. While the Soviets hastened to beef up their defensive capabilities, the military and political decision makers of the West used their rival's military buildup as justification for building more weapons.

Meanwhile, in order to back its offensive plans Washington dispatched its B-29 bombers to Europe during the first Berlin crisis in 1948. In 1949 the US-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed, six years before the USSR and its Eastern European allies responded defensively by establishing the Warsaw Pact — the Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation, and Mutual Assistance.

The mushroom cloud of the first atomic explosion at Trinity Test Site, New Mexico. July 16, 1945
The mushroom cloud of the first atomic explosion at Trinity Test Site, New Mexico. July 16, 1945

Soviet Nuclear Bomb Test Undermined US Plan

Just before the USSR tested its first atomic bomb, the US' nuclear arsenal had reached 250 bombs and the Pentagon came to the conclusion that a victory over the Soviet Union was now “possible.” Alas, the detonation of the first nuclear bomb by the Soviet Union dealt a heavy blow to US militarists' plans.
“The Soviet atomic bomb test on August 29, 1949 shook Americans who had believed that their atomic monopoly would last much longer, but did not immediately alter the pattern of war planning. The key issue remained just what level of damage would force a Soviet surrender,” Professor Donald Angus MacKenzie of the University of Edinburgh remarked in his essay “Nuclear War Planning and Strategies of Nuclear Coercion.”

Although Washington's war planners knew that it would take years before the Soviet Union would obtain a significant atomic arsenal, the point was that the Soviet bomb could not be ignored.
The Scottish researcher highlighted that the US was mainly focused not on “deterrence” but on “offensive” preemptive strike. “There was unanimity in 'insider circles' that the United States ought to plan to win a nuclear war. The logic that to do so implied to strike first was inescapable,” he emphasized, adding that “first strike plans” were even represented in the official nuclear policy of the US.

Remarkably, the official doctrine, first announced by then US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles in 1954, assumed America's possible nuclear retaliation to “any” aggression from the USSR.

US' Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP)

Eventually, in 1960 the US' nuclear war plans were formalized in the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP).

At first, the SIOP envisaged a massive simultaneous nuclear strike against the USSR's nuclear forces, military targets, cities, as well as against China and Eastern Europe. It was planned that the US' strategic forces would use almost 3,500 atomic warheads to bomb their targets. According to US generals' estimates, the attack could have resulted in the death of about 285 to 425 million people. Some of the USSR's European allies were meant to be completely “wiped out.”

“We're just going to have to wipe it [Albania] out,” US General Thomas Power remarked at the 1960 SIOP planning conference, as quoted by MacKenzie.

However, the Kennedy administration introduced significant changes to the plan, insisting that the US military should avoid targeting Soviet cities and had to focus on the rival's nuclear forces alone. In 1962 the SIOP was modified but still it was acknowledged that the nuclear strike could lead to the death of millions of peaceful civilians.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy (May 29, 1917 - November 22, 1963), 35th President of the United States, serving from 1961 until his assassination in 1963
John Fitzgerald Kennedy (May 29, 1917 - November 22, 1963), 35th President of the United States, serving from 1961 until his assassination in 1963

The dangerous competition instigated by the US prompted Soviet Russia to beef up its nuclear capabilities and dragged both countries into the vicious circle of the nuclear arms race. Unfortunately, it seems that the lessons of the past have not been learnt by the West and the question of the “nuclearization” of Europe is being raised again.